Administrative litigation systems are a rapidly developing legal field in many countries. This book provides a comparative study of the administrative litigation systems in China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Macao, as well as a number of selected European countries that covers both states with an advanced rule of law and new democracies. Despite the different historical backgrounds and the broader context which has cultivated each individual system, this collective work illustrates the common characteristics of the rapid development of administrative litigation systems since the 1990s as a consequence of the advancement of the rule of law at a global level. All of the contributors have addressed a wide array of key issues in their particular jurisdiction, including court jurisdiction, the scope of judicial review, grounds of litigation claims and mediation in judicial process. Whilst pointing out the shortcomings and challenges which are faced by each jurisdiction, the book offers both ideas and inspiration on how the systems can learn from, and influence each other. This book is essential reading for those studying Chinese law, administrative litigation and comparative law, as well as judges and lawyers specialising in administrative litigation, and administrative courts.
’This book is original, useful and timely. It is original by the scope of the comparison it operates: old European rule of law systems, transitional Eastern Europe countries, Greater China. Useful, since it brings forth enlightening reflections on how administrative litigation systems make their way in a confrontation with the rest of constitutional powers. Timely, for it conveys precious information on the processes which should lead China progressively towards the rule of law.’ Jean-Bernard Auby, Professor of Public Law and Director of Governance and Public Law Center at Sciences Po, France ’This book provides a valuable and unique survey of the legal position in nine jurisdictions concerning judicial review, ranging from Macau to the Netherlands, useful to students and researchers alike.’ Susan Finder, Supreme People's Court Monitor